SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Cal) 335

ANANDA KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Tapan Kumar Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
Gopal Chandra Maity – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Opposite Party No 1 : Mrs. Sudipa Banerjee, Ms. Sneha Dutta

JUDGMENT :

Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J.

1. Instant Criminal Revision has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgement and order passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Contai, District-Purba Medinipur in Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2019, wherein the petitioner’s appeal was dismissed on contest and the impugned order dated 7.12.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur in C.R case No.198 of 2015 was affirmed. In the impugned judgement. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Contai directed the complainant/petitioner to surrender before the learned trial court within 10 days from date of the judgment.

2. In his application for criminal revision the petitioner urged that the judgement and order passed in the Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2019 is bad in law, illegal and the same is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is further contended that while passing the judgement the court ought to have scrutinized the source of Rs.3,50,000/-alleged to have been paid by the complainant/opposite party no.1 to the accused/petitioners as loan accommodation. It is also urged that l

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top